Ropa vs Sayed Babalal H. 2010 (5) Scc 663 As ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 3833 HP

   IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
               ON THE 26st DAY OF MAY, 2022
                        BEFORE
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR
             CRIMINAL REVISION No. 166 of 2022




                                                                    .
BETWEEN:­





     LAL CHAND SON OF SH.
     RULDU RAM,R/O VILLAGE





     ROPA,P.O. BHOJPUR, TEHSIL
     SUNDERNAGAR, DISTRICT
     MANDI,H.P.





                                                                    ....PETITIONER
    (BY SH. SURENDER VERMA
    ADVOCATE)            r
     AND

     BALWANT, SON OF SH. SOM
     NATH, R/O CLUB HOUSE,
     NEAR MLSM COLLEGE,
     SUNDERNAGAR, TEHSIL



     SUNDERNAGAR, DISTRICT                                      ......RESPONDENT
     MANDI,H.P.
    (BY MR. JAI RAM SHARMA ADVOCATE




    Whether approved for reporting?





                 This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court delivered
the following:





                            JUDGMENT

Present Revision Petition has been filed assailing judgment,

dated 18.12.2021, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sundernagar, District

Mandi, H.P. in Criminal Appeal No. 5 of 2021, whereby judgment/order dated

6.1.2021, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1,

Sundernagar, District Mandi, HP in Criminal Case No. 530­1/2016

convicting and sentencing the petitioner­accused under Section 138 of

Negotiable Instruments Act to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of

six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,25,000/­ and in the event of default in

.

making payment of fine convict shall be liable to undergo further

imprisonment of similar nature for a period of one month, has been affirmed.

2. Lal Chand (Petitioner) and Balwant Singh (Respondent) are

present in the Court today and their statements, on oath, have been

recorded separately . They have been identified by their respective counsel.

3. Complainant­Balwant Singh, in his statement, has stated that

cheque amount is Rs.80,000/­ and compensation amount is Rs.1,25,000/­. He

has further stated that keeping in view the financial condition of petitioner

Lal Chand , he has agreed to settle the dispute for Rs.90,000/­. He has

further stated that petitioner Lal Chand has deposited Rs. 37,500/­ in the

trial Court and balance amount of Rs.52,500/­ has been paid by Lal Chand to

him in cash and, in turn, subject to receipt of Rs.37,500/­, he has agreed to

withdraw the complaint for compounding the case and, therefore, he has

payed for permission to withdraw the complaint in terms of compromise. He

has further stated that the aforesaid amount be released in his Saving Bank

Account i.e Central Bank of India bearing Account No.2196884671 IFSC

Code CBIN0284017. Photocopy of the same has also been placed on record.

4. In his statement, petitioner Lal Chand endorsing statement

made by Balwant Singh (respondent) to be true and correct has

communicated no objection for release of Rs.37,500/­ in favour of Balwant

Singh (respondent).

5. Petitioner as well as respondent in their respective statements

.

have stated that they have deposed in the Court out of their free will and

consent, and without any threat or coercion of any kind.

6. Consequently,respondent/complainant is permitted to withdraw

the complaint and matter is compounded and complaint arising out of

dishonor of cheque, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, is

treated to be withdrawn and judgments of conviction and sentence passed by

the Courts below are quashed and set aside. Petitioner­accused is acquitted of

the accusation framed against him.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is

facing poor financial condition and is not able to pay compounding fee @ 15%

and, therefore, a prayer has been made by learned counsel for exempting the

compounding fee, keeping in view ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court in

Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. 2010 (5) SCC 663 as clarified

by the Apex Court in Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority

Vs. Prateek Jain and another 2014 (10) SCC 690.

8. Considering submissions made by learned counsel for the

petitioner, I find that it is a fit case for exempting the compounding fee and

accordingly the same is exempted.

9. Trial Court is directed to release the amount of Rs.37,500/­

along with interest, if any accrued thereon, in favour of respondent­

complainant by remitting the same in in his Bank Account No. 2196884671

.

IFSC Code CBIN0284017, without issuing any notice to the petitioner on

production of downloaded copy of the order.

10. Petition stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms, so also the

pending application(s), if any.

11. Parties are permitted to produce a copy of this order,

downloaded from the web­page of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh,

before the trial Court authorities concerned, and the said Court/authorities

shall not insist for production of a certified copy but if required, may verify it

from Website of the High Court.

                                               (Vivek Singh Thakur),




     th
26 May, 2022                                    Judge.
   (veena)